From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E782C48BE3 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 07:37:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 503A7208CA for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 07:37:17 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1561361837; bh=x3aCy3cw4nqUw/E68KNlHb4J1hBjM6xKiEFbJNmuLeg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=1UpJ13cHo4DKbCSP3nYhvDEvq4cqiOlRfhES4A93X0+8S9U8uFQRq7ooTuHD95u08 xfs4yPYJRsdaQqKPqRf6jVSGiAI6rUmkPd7PGctwYDKp+tR6SZ6ZwRwe7V0fbpboKM avB32AC/j0YNCSE82HMPT+PBa2Pb949HZUrW5crY= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728021AbfFXHhQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jun 2019 03:37:16 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:39106 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726077AbfFXHhP (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jun 2019 03:37:15 -0400 Received: from localhost (li1825-44.members.linode.com [172.104.248.44]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EA3AE2089F; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 07:37:12 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1561361834; bh=x3aCy3cw4nqUw/E68KNlHb4J1hBjM6xKiEFbJNmuLeg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=VH4pN3Hg6X32GIipweiPjWQNXUNkTYG4LTH0myZFrICQznUQrnUJ9AMyi/6/KegHw P3YrhHNxl6k6p/c1XwHdQ95ue6PqTYEsp6sNJDhoQzC7XD7Qdw/fh4IH/CkF03d+ql pjsiCmcyZVPhNivMoWtKR/+VH/uzTJiuhwMydzEk= Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 15:36:59 +0800 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Tri Vo Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Joel Fernandes , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Sandeep Patil , Viresh Kumar , Hridya Valsaraju , Linux PM , "Cc: Android Kernel" , LKML Subject: Re: Alternatives to /sys/kernel/debug/wakeup_sources Message-ID: <20190624073659.GA13957@kroah.com> References: <20190618182502.GC203031@google.com> <4587569.x9DSL43cXO@kreacher> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 06:48:43PM -0700, Tri Vo wrote: > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 1:35 AM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 1:52 AM Joel Fernandes wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 7:15 PM Tri Vo wrote: > > > [snip] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Android userspace reading wakeup_sources is not ideal because: > > > > > > > > - Debugfs API is not stable, i.e. Android tools built on top of it are > > > > > > > > not guaranteed to be backward/forward compatible. > > > > > > > > - This file requires debugfs to be mounted, which itself is > > > > > > > > undesirable for security reasons. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To address these problems, we want to contribute a way to expose these > > > > > > > > statistics that doesn't depend on debugfs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Some initial thoughts/questions: Should we expose the stats in sysfs? > > > > > > > > Or maybe implement eBPF-based solution? What do you think? > > > > > > > > > > > > We are going through Android's out-of-tree kernel dependencies along with > > > > > > userspace APIs that are not necessarily considered "stable and forever > > > > > > supported" upstream. The debugfs dependencies showed up on our radar as a > > > > > > result and so we are wondering if we should worry about changes in debugfs > > > > > > interface and hence the question(s) below. > > > > > > > > > > > > So, can we rely on /d/wakeup_sources to be considered a userspace API and > > > > > > hence maintained stable as we do for other /proc and /sys entries? > > > > > > > > > > > > If yes, then we will go ahead and add tests for this in LTP or > > > > > > somewhere else suitable. > > > > > > > > > > No, debugfs is not ABI. > > > > > > > > > > > If no, then we would love to hear suggestions for any changes that need to be > > > > > > made or we simply just move the debugfs entry into somewhere like > > > > > > /sys/power/ ? > > > > > > > > > > No, moving that entire file from debugfs into sysfs is not an option either. > > > > > > > > > > The statistics for the wakeup sources associated with devices are already there > > > > > under /sys/devices/.../power/ , but I guess you want all wakeup sources? > > > > > > > > > > That would require adding a kobject to struct wakeup_source and exposing > > > > > all of the statistics as separate attributes under it. In which case it would be > > > > > good to replace the existing wakeup statistics under /sys/devices/.../power/ > > > > > with symbolic links to the attributes under the wakeup_source kobject. > > > > > > > > Thanks for your input, Rafael! Your suggestion makes sense. I'll work > > > > on a patch for this. > > > > > > Does that entail making each wake up source, a new sysfs node under a > > > particular device, and then adding stats under that new node? > > > > Not under a device, because there are wakeup source objects without > > associated devices. > > > > It is conceivable to have a "wakeup_sources" directory under > > /sys/power/ and sysfs nodes for all wakeup sources in there. > > > > Then, instead of exposing wakeup statistics directly under > > /sys/devices/.../power/, there can be symbolic links from there to the > > new wakeup source nodes under "wakeup_sources" (so as to avoid > > exposing the same data in two different places in sysfs, which may be > > confusing). > > This may be a dumb question. Is it appropriate to make symbolic links > in sysfs from one attribute to another attribute? For example, > /sys/devices/.../power/wakeup_count -> > /sys/power/wakeup_sources/.../wakeup_count. Why? would you want that? > I only see kobject to kobject symlinks around. And I don't think we > can make /sys/devices/.../power/ directory a symlink to where our new > wakeup stats will be, since the former contains attributes other than > wakeup ones. No, don't link attributes, they refer to the kobject that created them. I really doubt that this is the same kobject in both places :) thanks, greg k-h